Union / Fedex / UPS - An Analogy

Livin the Dream?

Disillusioned UPSer
I'm right there in the Northern Hemisphere. Is this your view? Please explain to me how I am so far removed from reality.

If you were walking down the road, there was nobody around in sight, and you saw a $100 bill lying on the ground, would you pick it up?


Oh, and yes, I am setting you up.
 

JimJimmyJames

Big Time Feeder Driver
I don't know about you but I work at UPS not to primarily serve customers, management, shareholders, etc. I work there for a paycheck that benefits me. Why else does anyone work for another?

If UPS wants to convince the government to enact laws that will benefit my company which therefore will benefit my paycheck, I am all for it.

Now, what UPS is doing is trying to do is convince the government that FedEx is not playing fair. And since the public could care less one way or another if UPS or FedEx delivers their package, so long as it gets to them, we need to make our case through their eyes, not our own.

If it appears FedEx is not doing it fairly we will win. Period. But we are not doing this out of fairness per se. We are doing this to benefit us financially.

But remember, that is not to say we cannot be altruistic at the same time. But that is not our primary goal. Just as helping our community is not really the primary goal of UPS' support of the United Way.

And one last note, we are doing this through legal channels. The Tonya Harding analogy does not apply.
 

Livin the Dream?

Disillusioned UPSer
I don't know about you but I work at UPS not to primarily serve customers, management, shareholders, etc. I work there for a paycheck that benefits me. Why else does anyone work for another?

If UPS wants to convince the government to enact laws that will benefit my company which therefore will benefit my paycheck, I am all for it.

Now, what UPS is doing is trying to do is convince the government that FedEx is not playing fair. And since the public could care less one way or another if UPS or FedEx delivers their package, so long as it gets to them, we need to make our case through their eyes, not our own.

If it appears FedEx is not doing it fairly we will win. Period. But we are not doing this out of fairness per se. We are doing this to benefit us financially.

But remember, that is not to say we cannot be altruistic at the same time. But that is not our primary goal. Just as helping our community is not really the primary goal of UPS' support of the United Way.

And one last note, we are doing this through legal channels. The Tonya Harding analogy does not apply.


What you wrote here? I completely agree, with one minor note;

"...which therefore will benefit my paycheck"
Surely you can't be serious.
 

Hawk780

No One in Particular
LTD, I think you make valid points (ie, clean up your own backyard before concerning yourself with others, etc), but I think it's interesting that your arguement does not even address the fact that we do identical work (on a company-wide scale, that is, move packages from point A to B), and are governed by significantly different rules (NLRA vs Railroad Act). In your analogy, it would be like the #2 car having some essential advantage, say, a turbocharger, or no restrictor plate, while the #1 car couldn't...just my opinion.
 

Livin the Dream?

Disillusioned UPSer
LTD, I think you make valid points (ie, clean up your own backyard before concerning yourself with others, etc), but I think it's interesting that your arguement does not even address the fact that we do identical work (on a company-wide scale, that is, move packages from point A to B), and are governed by significantly different rules (NLRA vs Railroad Act). In your analogy, it would be like the #2 car having some essential advantage, say, a turbocharger, or no restrictor plate, while the #1 car couldn't...just my opinion.

But...But... you get it! You and I are both looking at the same thing, but seeing differently. What you write is correct / valid.

To use your analogy to my analogy (??) - It is like the #1 car went to the race, touting how it has made the choice to use a restrictor plate and no turbocharger in this race. Then, when it finds out that, huh, the #2 car is using a turbo, no restrictor, and is catching up, it complains to NASCAR to change the rules, mid race, to hobble the #2 car. It is sour grapes.
 
But...But... you get it! You and I are both looking at the same thing, but seeing differently. What you write is correct / valid.

To use your analogy to my analogy (??) - It is like the #1 car went to the race, touting how it has made the choice to use a restrictor plate and no turbocharger in this race. Then, when it finds out that, huh, the #2 car is using a turbo, no restrictor, and is catching up, it complains to NASCAR to change the rules, mid race, to hobble the #2 car. It is sour grapes.

From the beginning UPS entered a race that did not allow turbo chargers. then FedEx entered the race using them because the rules committee let them do so. UPS just wants to keep the race fair.
 

Overpaid Union Thug

Well-Known Member
The successful people are the ones that don't expect life to be fair, don't waste time fighting to make it fair. The successful ones understand that looking for fairness wastes time.

The successful ones are those that realize it is what it is, and do what is necessary to succeed anyway.

Nice try, though.

If that post wasn't based on the fact that you generalized how every successful person in the world thinks then it MIGHT hold some truth. I didn't realize that you were the spokesperson for them.
 

Livin the Dream?

Disillusioned UPSer
But THEY DO - UPS is just not in the position to take advantage of those rules.

If there were a 3rd player in this, using the IC model, it would be a different ballgame / scenario.
 
But THEY DO - UPS is just not in the position to take advantage of those rules.

If there were a 3rd player in this, using the IC model, it would be a different ballgame / scenario.
Make up your mind, is this a ball game or a race?
And NO they don't run by the same rules. That is what the law suits that the union have been filing on all these years. FedEx is governed by one agency, UPS by another, each with their own sets of rules.
 
Uh, you didn't say anything. I actually went back to edit my initial reply, but couldn't find a way to change it for the better. You re-stated the blindingly obvious. Yes, they play by different, yet legal, rules. So what?
I only re-stated the blindly obvious because you are obviously blind.
 

Hawk780

No One in Particular
But...But... you get it! You and I are both looking at the same thing, but seeing differently. What you write is correct / valid.

To use your analogy to my analogy (??) - It is like the #1 car went to the race, touting how it has made the choice to use a restrictor plate and no turbocharger in this race. Then, when it finds out that, huh, the #2 car is using a turbo, no restrictor, and is catching up, it complains to NASCAR to change the rules, mid race, to hobble the #2 car. It is sour grapes.

I don't know if you understand the vast differences between the NLRA vs Railroad Act. It is nearly impossible for FedEx to organize under the current legislation (entire nation of FedEx voters would have to organize in unison). Whether you like unions or not, I think it would be difficult to justify having a seperate set of rules.

My opinion is FedEx should only unionize if the employees see it as beneficial, but at least make it possible. It'd be like car#1 having NASCAR rules, and car#2 having F1 rules (assuming the F1 rules would allow car#2 to operate at a much lower cost/higher speed). I love analogies.
 
Top